Affirmative defenses--legal tools to avoid taking responsibility--seem to be multiplying and mutating. The sudden medical emergency defense is an example. And it is frequently applied to situations like this tragic one.
Last Saturday, a jogger was hit and killed by a motorist in Renton, Washington. The 37-year old was jogging along the northbound lanes of Duvall Avenue Northeast when a southbound car drifted across four lanes of traffic and struck the jogger from behind. The car then went down an embankment. The 34-year old driver sustained injuries. If the driver had a heart attack or even suffered a fit of coughing or sneezing, the defense attorneys (for both the liability and UIM carriers) will take a hard line that the driver is not liable for the death of the unfortunate jogger. At what point should the consequences of a medical emergency become the driver's responsibility?
